Harikrish

6 hours ago, studiot said:

Whilst I don't quite agree with you, the evolution of God is an interesting idea that does not deserve minus points IMHO so +1 to compensate.

Bender, I don't see it is relevant who wrote the parts about sending the flood or Jesus, or any other part for that matter.
God is supposedly a long lived being to say the least of it! So no one human could write it all.

Harikrish, just because it was 'written' in the 'Bible' does not prove anything.

The bible is believed by more people than the people who take Darwin seriously. The only problem with this religiousity is the rigid belief in the immutability of God. But scriptures can be used  to prove the rational behind them need not be static.

For example scriptures tell us God created man in his own image.

Do you think God remained a chimp, or like man God too evolved?

6 hours ago, DrP said:

The bible says that god is unchanging.  Is that bit wrong as well?  

There are 66 books written by different authors that make up the Bible. It was written at a time when certain beliefs about God were immutable.

But we know scriptures tell us God created man in his own image.

Do you think God remained a chimp, or like man evolved?

5 hours ago, studiot said:

 

What, please, is a non religious believer?

A non religious believe is someone who does not believe in a God/deity.

Yes it is time to believe in both evolution and evolution of God.

The Bible proves even God evolved over time.

From sending a Giant  flood to destroy the world to sending Jesus to save the world.

There are more religious believers than non religious believers even in our modern century, which proves religion is necessary and almost an innate part of our humanity.